Microaxial Flow Pump or Standard Care in Infarct-Related Cardiogenic Shock.

BACKGROUND: The effects of temporary mechanical circulatory support with a microaxial flow pump on mortality among patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) complicated by cardiogenic shock remains unclear. METHODS: In an international, multicenter, randomized trial, we assigned patients with STEMI and cardiogenic shock to receive a microaxial flow pump (Impella CP) plus standard care or standard care alone. The primary end point was death from any cause at 180 days. A composite safety end point was severe bleeding, limb ischemia, hemolysis, device failure, or worsening aortic regurgitation. RESULTS: A total of 360 patients underwent randomization, of whom 355 were included in the final analysis (179 in the microaxial-flow-pump group and 176 in the standard-care group). The median age of the patients was 67 years, and 79.2% were men. Death from any cause occurred in 82 of 179 patients (45.8%) in the microaxial-flow-pump group and in 103 of 176 patients (58.5%) in the standard-care group (hazard ratio, 0.74; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.55 to 0.99; P = 0.04). A composite safety end-point event occurred in 43 patients (24.0%) in the microaxial-flow-pump group and in 11 (6.2%) in the standard-care group (relative risk, 4.74; 95% CI, 2.36 to 9.55). Renal-replacement therapy was administered to 75 patients (41.9%) in the microaxial-flow-pump group and to 47 patients (26.7%) in the standard-care group (relative risk, 1.98; 95% CI, 1.27 to 3.09). CONCLUSIONS: The routine use of a microaxial flow pump with standard care in the treatment of patients with STEMI-related cardiogenic shock led to a lower risk of death from any cause at 180 days than standard care alone. The incidence of a composite of adverse events was higher with the use of the microaxial flow pump. (Funded by the Danish Heart Foundation and Abiomed; DanGer Shock ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01633502.).

Aortic Root Dilatation in Hypertensive Patients with Left Ventricular Hypertrophy-Application of A New Multivariate Predictive Model. The Life Study.

BACKGROUND: Available nomograms to predict aortic root (AoR) diameter for body surface area have limitations. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the use of a new multivariate predictive model to identify AoR dilatation in hypertensive patients with left ventricular hypertrophy. METHODS: 943 of 961 patients in the Losartan Intervention For Endpoint reduction in hypertension (LIFE) echocardiographic sub-study had the necessary baseline characteristics and echocardiographic 2D measurements of AoR size to be included. RESULTS: Predicted AoR (Sinus of Valsalva) diameter was 1.519 + (age [years] × 0.010) + (height [cm] × 0.010) - (gender [1 = M, 2 = F] × 0.247), and a measured AoR diameter exceeding the 97.5-percentile of this estimate was considered dilated. Measured AoR diameter was larger in men than in women (3.75 vs. 3.48 cm, p < 0.001) and AoR diameter predicted by the model was larger than predicted by nomogram (3.52 vs. 3.28 cm, p < 0.001). Using the multivariate model to identify patients with AoR dilatation, the prevalence was 13.7% in men and 12.3% in women (p = 0.537). There was consensus of AoR phenotype (normal/dilated) between model and nomogram in 92.8% of the patients. In multivariate logistic regression, AoR dilatation by model definition was predicted by presence of aortic regurgitation (OR 2.67, p < 0.001) and SD increase in age (OR 0.75, p = 0.023), pulse pressure (OR 0.64, p < 0.001), left ventricular mass index (OR 1.36, p = 0.08) and stroke volume (OR 1.45, p = 0.002), but not by body weight. CONCLUSIONS: Using the proposed model the prevalence of AoR dilatation was equal in men and women and the model seems to address the effects of gender, age and body size on AoR size. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: URL: https://www. CLINICALTRIALS: gov; Unique identifier: NCT00338260.

Exercise-induced change in circulating NT-proBNP could not distinguish between patients with and without coronary artery disease: the CADENCE study.

Objective. In patients with chest pain, exercise stress test has a moderate accuracy for coronary artery disease (CAD). Adding a reliable cardiac biomarker to the exercise test could potentially improve the precision of the test. We investigated circulating NT-proBNP levels before and during exercise stress test in patients with and without angiographically verified CAD. We hypothesized that NT-proBNP would give an additive diagnostic value to the exercise stress test. Methods. In patients presenting with symptoms of stable CAD, venous blood samples were taken at rest and within 5 min of termination of a maximal stress test on a bicycle ergometer. All study participants underwent coronary angiography. Significant CAD was defined as ≥75% stenosis in one or more segments of the coronary arteries. Results. Of the 297 participants, significant CAD was found in 111 (37%) patients. Resting levels of NT-proBNP were significantly higher in patients with CAD compared with patients without CAD (74.18 vs. 56.03 ng/L), p = .005. During exercise, NT-proBNP levels increased in the total population (p < .001). The rise was, however, not significantly different between the two groups (8.24 vs. 8.51 ng/L), p = .700. Combining resting NT-proBNP with positive exercise stress test was superior to exercise test alone in predicting CAD, AUC = 0.68 vs. 0.64. Conclusion. Exercise-induced change in circulating NT-proBNP could not distinguish between patients with or without CAD. However, resting levels of NT-proBNP were significantly higher in patients with CAD than those without CAD.

On-treatment HDL cholesterol predicts incident atrial fibrillation in hypertensive patients with left ventricular hypertrophy.

Purpose: Hypertensive patients are at increased risk of atrial fibrillation (AF). Although low baseline high density lipoprotein (HDL) cholesterol has been associated with a higher risk of AF, this has not been verified in recent population-based studies. Whether changing levels of HDL over time are more strongly related to the risk of new AF in hypertensive patients has not been examined.Material and methods: Incident AF was examined in relation to baseline and on-treatment HDL levels in 8267 hypertensive patients with no history of AF, in sinus rhythm on their baseline electrocardiogram, randomly assigned to losartan- or atenolol-based treatment. HDL levels at baseline and each year of testing were categorised into quartiles according to baseline HDL levels.Results: During 4.7 ± 1.10 years of follow-up, 645 patients (7.8%) developed new AF. In univariate Cox analyses, compared with the highest quartile of HDL levels (>1.78 mmol/l), patients with on-treatment HDL in the lowest quartile (≤ 1.21 mmol/l) had a 53% greater risk of new AF. Patients with on-treatment HDL in the second and third quartiles had intermediate increased risks of AF. Baseline HDL in the lowest quartile was not a significant predictor of new AF (hazard ratio (HR): 1.14, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.90-1.43). In multivariable Cox analyses adjusting for multiple baseline and time-varying covariates, the lowest quartile of on-treatment HDL remained associated with a nearly 54% increased risk of new AF (HR: 1.54, 95% CI: 1.16-2.05) whereas a baseline HDL≤ ⩽1.21 mmol/l was not predictive of new AF (HR: 1.01, 95% CI: 0.78-1.31).Conclusion: Lower on-treatment HDL is strongly associated with risk of new AF. These findings suggest that serial assessment of HDL can estimate AF risk better than baseline HDL in hypertensive patients with left ventricular hypertrophy. Future studies may investigate whether therapies that increase HDL can lower risk of developing AF.Clinical Trials Registration: http://clinicaltrials.gov/ct/show/NCT00338260?order=1.

Rationale and design of DanGer shock: Danish-German cardiogenic shock trial.

OBJECTIVE: The DanGer Shock trial test the hypothesis that left ventricular (LV) mechanical circulatory support with Impella CP transvalvular microaxial flow pump improves survival in patients with ST segment elevation acute myocardial infarction complicated by cardiogenic shock (AMICS) compared to conventional guideline-driven treatment. This paper describes the rationale and design of the randomized trial, in addition to the baseline characteristics of the population screened and enrolled so far. METHODS: The DanGer Shock study is a prospective, multicenter, open-label trial in patients with AMICS randomized 1:1 to Impella CP or current guideline-driven therapy with planned enrollment of 360 patients. Patients comatose after out of hospital cardiac arrest are excluded. Eligible patients are randomized immediately following shock diagnosis. Among patients randomized to receive Impella CP, the device is placed prior to angioplasty. The primary endpoint is all-cause mortality at 180 days. Baseline characteristics of patients screened and randomized in the DanGer Shock as of June 2018 are compared with 2 contemporary AMICS studies. RESULTS: As of end of June 2018, 314 patients were screened and 100 patients were randomized. Patients had median arterial lactate of 5.5 mmol/L (interquartile range 3.7-8.8 mmol/L), median systolic blood pressure of 76 mmHg (interquartile range 70-88 mmHg), and median LV ejection fraction of 20% (interquartile range 10%-30%). CONCLUSION: The DanGer Shock trial will be the first adequately powered randomized trial to address whether mechanical circulatory LV support with Impella CP can improve survival in AMICS. Baseline characteristics of the first 100 randomized patients indicate a population in profound cardiogenic shock.

Association of left bundle branch block with new onset abnormal wall motion in treated hypertensive patients with left ventricle hypertrophy: the LIFE Echo Sub-study.

AIMS: We aimed to investigate whether left bundle branch block (LBBB) is related to new-onset left ventricle (LV) wall motion abnormalities during treatment in hypertensive patients with electrocardiographic (ECG) defined left ventricular hypertrophy (LVH). METHODS AND RESULTS: 960 patients with essential hypertension and ECG-LVH participating in the LIFE Echo Sub-study were investigated at baseline and annually with echocardiography, during randomized antihypertensive therapy. After excluding patients with LV wall motion abnormalities at baseline and patients developing new-onset LBBB during study time, we investigated 784 patients. The participants with (n = 32) and without (n = 752) LBBB were similar regarding most baseline variables. Logistic regression models controlling for LV mass index, Framingham risk score, and randomized treatment assignment were used to assess the odds ratio of developing new-onset abnormal LV wall motion on annual follow-up echocardiograms. The likelihood of developing new global LV wall motion abnormalities in patients with LBBB was not higher compared to those without LBBB except at year 5 (p = .002). The likelihood of developing new segmental LV wall motion abnormalities in patients with LBBB was however higher compared to patients without LBBB after 1 year (OR = 3.1, 95% CI = 0.7-14.2, p = .173); 2 years (OR = 6.9, 2.1-22.4, p = .003); 3 years (OR = 5.3, 2.0-14.3, p < .001), 4 years (OR = 4.0, 1.6-10.3, p = .003 and 5 years (OR = 4.1, 1.0-16.2, p = .394) of treatment. CONCLUSION: Among patients with ECG-LVH, undergoing antihypertensive treatment, the presence of LBBB independently identifies individuals with ∼3- to 7-fold greater odds of developing new segmental abnormal LV wall motion. These findings suggest that LBBB may be a marker for progressive myocardial disease.

Antihypertensive therapy prevents new-onset atrial fibrillation in patients with isolated systolic hypertension: the LIFE study.

Aims: Atrial fibrillation (AF) is associated with increased cardiovascular risk and the incidence increases with age, hypertension and left ventricular hypertrophy (LVH). Reducing in-treatment systolic blood pressure (SBP) prevents new-onset AF but has previously not been studied in patients with isolated systolic hypertension (ISH). We aimed to investigate the effect on preventing new-onset AF by decreased in-treatment SBP in patients with ISH compared to patients with non-ISH. Methods and results: Double-blind, randomized, parallel-group study of 1320 patients with ISH and electrocardiographic (ECG) LVH, included among the 9193 patients in the Losartan Intervention For Endpoint reduction in hypertension (LIFE) study. Annual ECGs were Minnesota coded centrally, and new-onset AF was evaluated in 1248 ISH patients and compared with 7583 non-ISH patients during mean 4.8 ± 0.9 years follow-up. Cox regression analyses were used to assess the effect of reduced in-treatment SBP. New-onset AF occurred in 61 (4.9%) ISH patients and 292 (3.9%) non-ISH patients. In multivariate analysis lower in-treatment SBP was associated with 17% risk reduction (p = 0.008) for new-onset AF in ISH patients and 9% risk reduction (p = 0.006) in non-ISH patients per 10 mmHg decrease in in-treatment SBP, independent of treatment modality, baseline risk factors, baseline SBP and in-treatment heart rate and ECG-LVH. There was a significant interaction (p = 0.041) in favor of SBP reduction and AF prevention in ISH vs. non-ISH patients. Conclusion: Our data suggest that the effect of in-treatment SBP reduction in preventing new-onset AF is stronger in ISH compared to non-ISH patients with hypertension and ECG-LVH. However, the principal findings were the same in ISH and non-ISH patients.

Assessing Optimal Blood Pressure in Patients With Asymptomatic Aortic Valve Stenosis: The Simvastatin Ezetimibe in Aortic Stenosis Study (SEAS).

BACKGROUND: Evidence for treating hypertension in patients with asymptomatic aortic valve stenosis is scarce. We used data from the SEAS trial (Simvastatin Ezetimibe in Aortic Stenosis) to assess what blood pressure (BP) would be optimal. METHODS: A total of 1767 patients with asymptomatic aortic stenosis and no manifest atherosclerotic disease were analyzed. Outcomes were all-cause mortality, cardiovascular death, heart failure, stroke, myocardial infarction, and aortic valve replacement. BP was analyzed in Cox models as the cumulative average of serially measured BP and a time-varying covariate. RESULTS: The incidence of all-cause mortality was highest for average follow-up systolic BP ≥160 mm Hg (4.3 per 100 person-years; 95% confidence interval [CI], 3.1-6.0) and lowest for average systolic BP of 120 to 139 mm Hg (2.0 per 100 person-years; 95% CI, 1.6-2.6). In multivariable analysis, all-cause mortality was associated with average systolic BP <120 mm Hg (hazard ratio [HR], 3.4; 95% CI, 1.9-6.1), diastolic BP ≥90 mm Hg (HR, 1.8; 95% CI, 1.1-2.9), and pulse pressure <50 mm Hg (HR, 1.8; 95% CI, 1.1-2.9), with systolic BP of 120 to 139 mm Hg, diastolic BP of 70 to 79 mm Hg, and pulse pressure of 60 to 69 mm Hg taken as reference. Low systolic and diastolic BPs increased risk in patients with moderate aortic stenosis. With a time-varying systolic BP from 130 to 139 mm Hg used as reference, mortality was increased for systolic BP ≥160 mm Hg (HR, 1.7; P=0.033) and BP of 120 to 129 mm Hg (HR, 1.6; P=0.039). CONCLUSIONS: Optimal BP seems to be systolic BP of 130 to 139 mm Hg and diastolic BP of 70 to 90 mm Hg in these patients with asymptomatic aortic stenosis and no manifest atherosclerotic disease or diabetes mellitus. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT00092677.

Pro-coagulant activity during exercise testing in patients with coronary artery disease.

BACKGROUND: Strenuous exercise may trigger myocardial infarction through increased pro-coagulant activity. We aimed to investigate whether patients referred for exercise testing, who were found to have angiographically verified coronary artery disease (CAD), have a more hypercoagulable profile during exercise testing than those without CAD. METHODS: Patients with symptoms of stable CAD were examined with exercise electrocardiography on bicycle ergometer. Venous blood samples were taken at rest and within 5 min after end of exercise. The following haemostatic variables were analyzed: tissue factor pathway inhibitor (TFPI) activity and antigen, prothrombin fragment 1 + 2 (F1 + 2), D-dimer and endogenous thrombin potential (ETP). All participants underwent conventional coronary angiography. CAD was defined as having any degree of atherosclerosis. RESULTS: Out of the 106 patients enrolled, 70 were found to have CAD. Mean exercise duration was 10:06 ± 4:11 min, with no significant differences between the groups. A significant increase from baseline to after exercise testing was observed in all measured markers in the total population (p ≤ 0.002 for all). In patients with angiographically verified CAD, total TFPI was significantly lower at baseline compared to patients without CAD (median value 67.4 and 76.6 ng/ml respectively, p = 0.027). However, no significant differences in changes of any of the measured markers during exercise were observed between the two groups. CONCLUSION: Pro-coagulant activity increased during short-term strenuous exercise testing in patients with symptoms suggestive of CAD. However the hypercoagulable state observed, was not more pronounced in patients with angiographically verified CAD compared to patients without CAD. NCT01495091.

Higher pulse pressure/stroke volume index is associated with impaired outcome in hypertensive patients with left ventricular hypertrophy the LIFE study.

We tested the prognostic impact of a marker of arterial stiffness, pulse pressure/stroke volume index (PP/SVi), in patients with hypertension and left ventricular (LV) hypertrophy. We used data from 866 patients randomized to losartan or atenolol-based antihypertensive treatment, over a median of 4.8 years, in the Losartan Intervention For Endpoint reduction in hypertension (LIFE) study. The association of PP/SVi with outcomes was tested in Cox regression analyses and reported as hazard ratio (HR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI). In multivariate regression, reduction of PP/SVi was independently associated with male gender, reduction in systolic blood pressure (BP) and relative wall thickness and with an increase in left ventricular ejection fraction (all p < .05). After adjusting for confounders, higher baseline PP/SVi predicted a 38% higher hazard of combined major fatal and non-fatal cardiovascular events (95% CI 1.04-1.84), and higher hazard of cardiovascular mortality (HR 2.35 (95% CI 1.59-3.48) and stroke (HR 1.45 (95% CI 1.06-1.99) (all p < .05). Higher PP/SVi also predicts higher rate of hospitalization for HF (HR 2.15 (95% CI 1.48-3.12) and a 52% higher hazard of all-cause mortality (95% CI 1.10-2.09) (both p < .05). In hypertensive patients with electrocardiographic LV hypertrophy, higher PP/SVi was associated with increased cardiovascular morbidity and mortality.

Increased hsCRP is associated with higher risk of aortic valve replacement in patients with aortic stenosis.

Objective To investigate relations between inflammation and aortic valve stenosis (AS) by measuring high-sensitivity C-reactive protein, at baseline (hsCRP0) and after 1 year (hsCRP1) and exploring associations with aortic valve replacement (AVR). Design We examined 1423 patients from the Simvastatin and Ezetimibe in Aortic Stenosis study. Results During first year of treatment, hsCRP was reduced both in patients later receiving AVR (2.3 [0.9-4.9] to 1.8 [0.8-5.4] mg/l, p < 0.001) and not receiving AVR (1.90 [0.90-4.10] to 1.3 [0.6-2.9] mg/l, p < 0.001). In Cox-regression analyses, hsCRP1 predicted later AVR (HR = 1.17, p < 0.001) independently of hsCRP0 (HR = 0.96, p = 0.33), aortic valve area (AVA) and other risk factors. A higher rate of AVR was observed in the group with high hsCRP0 and an increase during the first year (AVRhighCRP0CRP1inc = 47.3% versus AVRhighCRP0CRP1dec = 27.5%, p < 0.01). The prognostic benefit of a 1-year reduction in hsCRP was larger in patients with high versus low hsCRP0 eliminating the difference in incidence of AVR between high versus low hsCRP0 (AVRhighCRP0CRP1dec = 27.5% versus AVRlowCRP0CRP1dec = 25.8%, p = 0.66) in patients with reduced hsCRP during the first year. Conclusions High hsCRP1 or an increase in hsCRP during the first year of follow-up predicted later AVR independently of AVA, age, gender and other risk factors, although no significant improvement in C-statistics was observed.

Novel Trial Designs: Lessons Learned from Thrombus Aspiration During ST-Segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction in Scandinavia (TASTE) Trial.

In ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI), thrombus material is often present in partial or total coronary occlusion of the coronary vessel. However, prior to the thrombus aspiration during ST-Segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction in Scandinavia (TASTE) trial, it remained unclear whether routine thrombus aspiration during percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) treatment of STEMI would result in patients overall survival benefit. The TASTE trial was a multicenter, prospective, open-label, randomized, controlled clinical trial. In order to randomize patients to treatment and collect data, the infrastructure of a clinical population-based registry was used. Online data collection used the national comprehensive Swedish Coronary Angiography and Angioplasty Registry, a part of the SWEDEHEART registry. Monitoring and adjudication was done as part of the regular registry validation. There was no separate, dedicated monitoring or adjudication of endpoints. Included were 7244 patients with STEMI with chest pain and time of symptoms to hospital admission <24 h, in addition to new electrocardiographic ST-segment elevation or left bundle-branch block. Exclusion criteria were the need for emergency coronary artery bypass grafting. All-cause mortality at 30 days occurred in 2.8 % of the patients in the thrombus-aspiration group, as compared with 3.0 % in the PCI-only group (hazard ratio [HR] 0.94, 95 % confidence interval [CI] 0.72-1.22; p = 0.63). All-cause mortality at 1 year occurred in 5.3 % of the patients in the thrombus-aspiration group, as compared with 5.6 % in the PCI-only group (HR 0.94, 95 % CI 0.78-1.15; p = 0.57). No patients were lost to follow-up at 1 year. The incremental cost for trial execution was approximately US$ 300,000 or $50 per patient. Routine thrombus aspiration during PCI in patients with STEMI did not reduce the rate of all-cause mortality at 1 year. It is possible to design and conduct mega-trial at only small cost compared to a similar-sized conventional randomized clinical trial.

Prognostic value of energy loss index in asymptomatic aortic stenosis.

BACKGROUND: Aortic valve area index adjusted for pressure recovery (energy loss index [ELI]) has been suggested as a more accurate measure of aortic stenosis (AS) severity, but its prognostic value has not been determined in a prospective study. METHODS AND RESULTS: The relation between baseline ELI and rate of aortic valve events and combined total mortality and hospitalization for heart failure resulting from the progression of AS was assessed by multivariate Cox regression and reclassification analysis in 1563 patients with initial asymptomatic AS in the Simvastatin and Ezetimibe in Aortic Stenosis (SEAS) study. During 4.3 years follow-up, a total of 498 aortic valve events and 181 combined total mortalities and hospitalizations for heart failure caused by the progression of AS occurred. In Cox regression analyses, 1-cm(2)/m(2) lower baseline ELI predicted a 2-fold higher risk both for aortic valve events and for combined total mortality and hospitalization for heart failure independently of baseline peak aortic jet velocity or mean aortic gradient and independently of aortic root size (all P<0.05). In reclassification analysis, ELI improved the prediction of aortic valve events by 13% (95% confidence interval, 5-19), whereas the prediction of combined total mortality and hospitalization for heart failure resulting from the progression of AS did not improve significantly. CONCLUSIONS: In asymptomatic AS patients without known atherosclerotic disease or diabetes mellitus, ELI provides independent and additional prognostic information to that derived from conventional measures of AS severity, suggesting that ELI should be measured in such patients. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION INFORMATION: URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT00092677.

Stroke in patients with aortic stenosis: the Simvastatin and Ezetimibe in Aortic Stenosis study.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: There are limited data on risk stratification of stroke in aortic stenosis. This study examined predictors of stroke in aortic stenosis, the prognostic implications of stroke, and how aortic valve replacement (AVR) with or without concomitant coronary artery bypass grafting influenced the predicted outcomes. METHODS: Patients with mild-to-moderate aortic stenosis enrolled in the Simvastatin and Ezetimibe in Aortic Stenosis (SEAS) study. Diabetes mellitus, known atherosclerotic disease, and oral anticoagulation were exclusion criteria. Ischemic stroke was the primary end point, and poststroke survival a secondary outcome. Cox models treating AVR as a time-varying covariate were adjusted for atrial fibrillation and congestive heart failure, hypertension, age≥75 years, diabetes mellitus, stroke/transient ischemic attack, vascular disease, age 65-74 years and female sex (CHA2DS2-VASc) scores. RESULTS: One thousand five hundred nine patients were followed for 4.3±0.8 years (6529 patient-years). Rates of stroke were 5.6 versus 21.8 per 1000 patient-years pre- and post-AVR; 429 (28%) underwent AVR and 139 (9%) died. Atrial fibrillation (hazard ratio [HR], 2.7; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.1-6.6), CHA2DS2-VASc score (HR 1.4 per unit; 95% CI, 1.1-1.8), diastolic blood pressure (HR, 1.4 per 10 mm Hg; 95% CI, 1.1-1.8), and AVR with concomitant coronary artery bypass grafting (HR, 3.2; 95% CI, 1.4-7.2, all P≤0.026) were independently associated with stroke. Incident stroke predicted death (HR, 8.1; 95% CI, 4.7-14.0; P<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: In patients with aortic stenosis not prescribed oral anticoagulation, atrial fibrillation, AVR with concomitant coronary artery bypass grafting, and CHA2DS2-VASc score were the major predictors of stroke. Incident stroke was strongly associated with mortality. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT00092677.

Impact of isolated systolic hypertension on normalization of left ventricular structure during antihypertensive treatment (the LIFE study).

OBJECTIVE: We tested the impact of isolated systolic hypertension (ISH) on normalization of left ventricular (LV) structure during antihypertensive treatment. METHODS: Baseline and annual echocardiograms were recorded in 873 hypertensive patients with electrocardiographic signs of LV hypertrophy during 4.8 years randomized losartan- or atenolol-based antihypertensive treatment in the Losartan Intervention For Endpoint (LIFE) reduction in hypertension study and classified as having ISH (n = 128) if systolic BP ≥ 160 mmHg and diastolic BP < 90 mmHg, or non-ISH divided into two groups by systolic BP ≥ 160 mmHg (non-ISH ≥ 160 mmHg) (n = 645) and systolic BP < 160 mm Hg (n = 100) (non-ISH < 160 mmHg), respectively. RESULTS: Patients with ISH were older, with higher prevalence of diabetes than non-ISH groups and higher pulse pressure/stroke volume index (all p < 0.05). Baseline systolic blood pressure (BP) differed between groups and was highest in the non-ISH ≥ 160 mmHg group (p < 0.05). Systolic BP reduction was less in the ISH group (p < 0.05). LV geometry did not differ between ISH and non-ISH ≥ 160 mmHg groups at baseline, but ISH had more residual LV hypertrophy of concentric type at the last study visit (p < 0.05). In multivariate analysis, less reduction of LV mass was predicted by ISH (ß = - 0.07) independent of significant associations with baseline LVMi (ß = 0.52) and atenolol-based treatment (ß = - 0.08) and clinical confounders (all p < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: ISH is associated with impaired normalization of LV mass during systematic antihypertensive treatment. The findings may help explain the higher cardiovascular event rate previously reported in ISH patients.

The current best drug treatment for hypertensive heart failure with preserved ejection fraction.

More than 90 % of patients developing heart failure (HF) have hypertension. The most frequent concomitant conditions are type-2 diabetes mellitus, obesity, atrial fibrillation, and coronary disease. HF outcome research focuses on decreasing mortality and preventing hospitalization for worsening HF syndrome. All drugs that decrease these HF endpoints lower blood pressure. Current drug treatments for HF are (i) angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors, angiotensin receptor blockers or angiotensin receptor neprilysin inhibitors, (ii) selected beta-blockers, (iii) steroidal and non-steroidal mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists, and (iv) sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors. For various reasons, these drug treatments were first studied in HF patients with a reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). Subsequently, they have been investigated in HF patients with a preserved left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF, HFpEF) of mostly hypertensive etiology, and with modest benefits largely assessed on top of background treatment with the drugs already proven effective in HFrEF. Additionally, diuretics are given on symptomatic indications. Patients with HFpEF may have diastolic dysfunction but also systolic dysfunction visualized by lack of longitudinal shortening. Considering the totality of evidence and the overall need for antihypertensive treatment and/or treatment of hypertensive complications in almost all HF patients, the principal drug treatment of HF appears to be the same regardless of LVEF. Rather than LVEF-guided treatment of HF, treatment of HF should be directed by symptoms (related to the level of fluid retention), signs (tachycardia), severity (NYHA functional class), and concomitant diseases and conditions. All HF patients should be given all the drug classes mentioned above if well tolerated.

What Is the Current Best Drug Treatment for Hypertensive Heart Failure With Preserved Ejection Fraction? Review of the Totality of Evidence.

BACKGROUND: More than 90% of patients developing heart failure (HF) have an epidemiological background of hypertension. The most frequent concomitant conditions are type 2 diabetes mellitus, obesity, atrial fibrillation, and coronary disease, all disorders/diseases closely related to hypertension. METHODS: HF outcome research focuses on decreasing mortality and preventing hospitalization for worsening HF syndrome. All drugs that decrease these HF endpoints lower blood pressure. Current drug treatments for HF are (i) angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors, angiotensin receptor blockers, or angiotensin receptor neprilysin inhibitors, (ii) selected beta-blockers, (iii) steroidal and nonsteroidal mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists, and (iv) sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors. RESULTS: For various reasons, these drug treatments were first studied in HF patients with a reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). However, subsequently, they have been investigated and, as we see it, documented as beneficial in HF patients with a preserved left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF, HFpEF) and mostly hypertensive etiology, with effect estimates assessed partly on top of background treatment with the drugs already proven effective in HFrEF. Additionally, diuretics are given on symptomatic indications. CONCLUSIONS: Considering the totality of evidence and the overall need for antihypertensive treatment and/or treatment of hypertensive complications in almost all HF patients, the principal drug treatment of HF appears to be the same regardless of LVEF. Rather than LVEF-guided treatment of HF, treatment of HF should be directed by symptoms (related to the level of fluid retention), signs (tachycardia), severity (NYHA functional class), and concomitant diseases and conditions. All HF patients should be given all the drug classes mentioned above if well tolerated.

Development and validation of the ASGARD risk score for safe monitoring in asymptomatic nonsevere aortic stenosis.

AIMS: Current guidelines recommend serial echocardiography at minimum 1-2 year intervals for monitoring patients with nonsevere aortic valve stenosis (AS), which is costly and often clinically inconsequential.We aimed to develop and test whether the biomarker-based ASGARD risk score (Aortic Valve Stenosis Guarded by Amplified Risk Determination) can guide the timing of echocardiograms in asymptomatic patients with nonsevere AS. METHODS: The development cohort comprised 1,093 of 1,589 (69%) asymptomatic patients with mild-to-moderate AS who remained event-free one year after inclusion into the SEAS trial. Cox regression landmark analyses with a 2-year follow-up identified the model (ASGARD) with the lowest Akaike information criterion for association to AS-related composite outcome (heart failure hospitalization, aortic valve replacement, or cardiovascular death). Fine-Gray analyses provided cumulative event rates by ASGARD score quartiles. The ASGARD score was internally validated in the remaining 496 patients (31%) from the SEAS-cohort and externally in 71 asymptomatic outpatients with nonsevere AS from six Copenhagen hospitals. RESULTS: The ASGARD score comprises updated measurements of heart rate and age- and sex-adjusted N-terminal pro-brain natriuretic peptide upon transaortic maximal velocity (Vmax) from the previous year. The ASGARD score had high predictive accuracy across all cohorts (external validation: area under the curve: 0.74 [95% CI, 0.62-0.86]), and similar to an updated Vmax measurement. An ASGARD score ≤50% was associated with AS-related event rates ≤5% for a minimum of 15 months. CONCLUSION: The ASGARD score could provide a personalized and safe surveillance alternative to routinely planned echocardiograms, so physicians can prioritize echocardiograms for high-risk patients.

In this study, we developed and examined the potential of the novel ASGARD risk score to tailor personalized follow-up intervals for diagnostic heart scans, incorporating updated heart rate and blood marker measurements along with the heart scan data from the previous year. Patients with the ASGARD risk score within the lowest 50% had a low annual risk of aortic valve-related events (less than 5%) for a minimum of 15 months.In clinical settings, the ASGARD score could provide a personalized and safe monitoring alternative to routine heart scans, prioritizing the diagnostic heart scans for high-risk patients.

Clinical implications of electrocardiographic left ventricular strain and hypertrophy in asymptomatic patients with aortic stenosis: the Simvastatin and Ezetimibe in Aortic Stenosis study.

BACKGROUND: The prognostic impact of ECG left ventricular strain and left ventricular hypertrophy (LVH) in asymptomatic aortic stenosis is not well described. METHODS AND RESULTS: Data were obtained in asymptomatic patients randomized to simvastatin/ezetimibe combination versus placebo in the Simvastatin and Ezetimibe in Aortic Stenosis (SEAS) study. Primary end point was the first of myocardial infarction, nonhemorrhagic stroke, heart failure, aortic valve replacement, or cardiovascular death. The predictive value of ECG left ventricular strain (defined as T-wave inversion in leads V(4) through V(6)) and LVH, assessed by Sokolow-Lyon voltage criteria (R(V5-6)+S(V1) ≥35 mV) and Cornell voltage-duration criteria {[RaVL+S(V3)+(6 mV in women)]×QRS duration ≥2440 mV · ms}, was evaluated by adjustment for other prognostic covariates. A total of 1533 patients were followed for 4.3±0.8 years (6592 patient-years of follow-up), and 627 cardiovascular events occurred. ECG strain was present in 340 patients (23.6%), with LVH by Sokolow-Lyon voltage in 260 (17.1%) and by Cornell voltage-duration product in 220 (14.6%). In multivariable analyses, ECG left ventricular strain was associated with 3.1-fold higher risk of in-study myocardial infarction (95% confidence interval, 1.4-6.8; P=0.004). Similarly, ECG LVH by both criteria predicted, compared with no ECG LVH, 5.8-fold higher risk of heart failure (95% confidence interval, 2.0-16.8), 2.0-fold higher risk of aortic valve replacement (95% confidence interval, 1.3-3.1; both P=0.001), and 2.5-fold higher risk of a combined end point of myocardial infarction, heart failure, or cardiovascular death (95% confidence interval, 1.3-4.9; P=0.008). CONCLUSIONS: ECG left ventricular strain and LVH were independently predictive of poor prognosis in patients with asymptomatic aortic stenosis. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT00092677.

Left atrial volume as predictor of valve replacement and cardiovascular events in patients with asymptomatic mild to moderate aortic stenosis.

BACKGROUND: Left atrial (LA) size is known to increase with chronically increased left ventricular (LV) filling pressure. We hypothesized that LA volume was predictive of aortic valve replacement (AVR) and cardiovascular events in a large cohort of patients with asymptomatic mild to moderate aortic valve stenosis. METHODS: Transthoracic echocardiography was performed in 1,758 patients in the Simvastatin and Ezetemibe in Aortic Stenosis study. LA volume was measured in the apical four-chamber view in 1,503 patients (85%). The relation of LA volume to AVR or a combined endpoint of cardiovascular events (AVR, congestive heart failure due to aortic stenosis or death from cardiovascular causes) was evaluated. RESULTS: AVR was performed in 415 (28%) patients, whereas 505 (34%) reached the combined endpoint. A significant but weak association of increased LA volume and risk of the combined endpoint was found (log-rank test: P = 0.02), but this relation did not reach any significance in a multivariate model adjusting for age, gender, aortic valve area index, LV ejection fraction, LV hypertrophy, hypertension, and mitral regurgitation. LA volume was not predictive of AVR (log-rank test: P = 0.3). CONCLUSION: In asymptomatic patients with mild to moderate Aortic valve stenosis (AS), LA volume was not predictive of the combined endpoint of Aortic valve replacement, development of heart failure or cardiac death. AVA and presence of LV hypertrophy were the only predictors of events in multivariate analysis.